From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Dilger Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/20] return f_fsid for statfs(2) Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 21:44:47 -0700 Message-ID: <20090120044447.GM3286@webber.adilger.int> References: <4974B8C4.3070703@suse.de> <1232393334.5893.42.camel@norville.austin.ibm.com> <20090119233651.GK3286@webber.adilger.int> <1232419149.19468.3.camel@norville.austin.ibm.com> <20090120041349.GL3286@webber.adilger.int> <49755376.3000100@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Cc: Dave Kleikamp , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Roman Zippel , "Sergey S. Kostyliov" , OGAWA Hirofumi , Mikulas Patocka , Bob Copeland , Anders Larsen , reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org, Phillip Lougher , Christoph Hellwig , Evgeniy Dushistov , Jan Kara , linux-fsdevel To: Coly Li Return-path: In-reply-to: <49755376.3000100@suse.de> Content-disposition: inline Sender: reiserfs-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Jan 20, 2009 12:30 +0800, Coly Li wrote: > Ext[234] is sophisticated to have on-disk uuid record. Most file systems > in the patches (except jfs and reiser3) do not have a persistent uuid, > a reasonable/feasible solution without media format modification is fsid > in boot/mount life cycle. That's why huge_encode_dev(sb->s_bdev->bd_dev) > is used here. For jfs and reiserfs3, is there any use case for > persistent fsid cross boots ? I would say yes, this is worthwhile to do, or the fsid can change between boots unnecessarily. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.